Cheating

I have the "same" friend except they managed two kids and the youngest is now 8. She is asexual now. He (my friend) is in despair over his sexual frustration. But the rest of the relationship works well. He is sexually faithful at this time, however the mere fact that I know all this about them would probably be seen a an infidelity on his part in his wife's eyes. Yet the taboo of not discussing with your guy mates that your wife doesn't want to have sex with you anymore...

And so, I am the confidante.

Would it be so much worse if I was also a fuck buddy? We already have the emotional intimacy. So is he already a cheater? His wife may define it so, although she's comfortable with us being friends. I guess she imagines we only talk about work and more trivial things.

So, physically he's choosing not to cheat with me or any other. Does that make him monogamous? Only sexually. Is he polyamorous? Well, our friendship and the love in it isn't entirely platonic.

Lastly, I think DADT has a bad rap for silly reasons. The notion of lying by omission is negated by DADT. It simply means the primary (usually) partner doesn't want to know. I don't want to know the details of my husband's extramarital sex life either, despite being kitchen table in all other respects. Personally, I think the saddest part about DADT agreements would be in the untimely event of someone's death. If it's the shared lover, you can bet that the legal spouse isn't going to welcome the extramarital partner to any part of the farewell. If it's the extramarital partner who dies, the legal spouse is unlikely to be a good support for their grieving partner.

In short, IMO, most people are hung up on the physical when they talk about cheating. We actually have a very unwell society regarding that, and it is socially constructed and the vast majority of people I've ever known rebel against that social construction more than once in their lives indicating a natural inclination towards non-monogamy. But perhaps my social circles have called like to like.

Evie, thanks for sharing that. We do know the same kind of guy and we are in the same position. In this case, my friend is an ex of mine, and I'm still fond of him and still attracted to him. (More in my blog on this.) And he's attracted to me. I warned him not to marry this woman. When he first told me about her he told me she wasn't in the least bit kinky. I said, find a nice kinky girl to marry. Did he listen? No. And now... she won't have sex at all. Ugh. Why do people do this to themselves?

His wife doesn't know we've met in person twice this year. He takes a personal day off work, and tells her he's going disc golfing, or working on his car. Which is true. He just leaves out the part where he's having coffee with me. I know he's making bad choices.
 
I don't view cheating as a sign of monogamy or nonmonogamy at all. To me, it's all about honesty and communication.

The desire to have sex with others or not isn't relevant. What's relevant is being willing to break relationship agreements, and to lie or omit facts to partners.

So yes, I think that part of cheating is by far the worst. It doesn't matter about the sex or love or anything else- it's about how you can justify lying to your partner about it.
 
And if those "agreements" are dictated, not negotiated?
 
And if those "agreements" are dictated, not negotiated?

Would you want to be with a partner who dictated relationship agreements? We always have choices.
 
Those choices are a bit more limited when kids are involved and there is not actual abuse within the relationship, just a evolution into sexual incompatibility.

Yes, I've pointed out to my friend all the choices he could make, and he's chosen to suffer celibacy for now. But if he did cheat, it wouldn't mean he's innately non monogamous, it would mean that he's reached the end of his tether after years of attempted negotiation and couples therapy.

We're too quick to blame the cheater when so often they are a victim.
 
Those choices are a bit more limited when kids are involved and there is not actual abuse within the relationship, just a evolution into sexual incompatibility.

Yes, I've pointed out to my friend all the choices he could make, and he's chosen to suffer celibacy for now. But if he did cheat, it wouldn't mean he's innately non monogamous, it would mean that he's reached the end of his tether after years of attempted negotiation and couples therapy.

We're too quick to blame the cheater when so often they are a victim.

I see it as being deal breaking on both sides in situations like that. It's never okay to demand someone be sexual with you, but if one person wants to be sexual and the other does not, never the twain shall meet.

Personally? I still can't justify the dishonesty, and I have to admit that calling a cheater a victim sticks in my craw a little. I'd have a lot more respect for the partner who wanted sex flat out telling their spouse that they needed sex and this is what they were going to do. That throws the ball back in the other partner's court so they can consider whether it's truly reasonable to dictate that your partner can't have a sex life at all.
 
I see it as being deal breaking on both sides in situations like that. It's never okay to demand someone be sexual with you, but if one person wants to be sexual and the other does not, never the twain shall meet.

Personally? I still can't justify the dishonesty, and I have to admit that calling a cheater a victim sticks in my craw a little. I'd have a lot more respect for the partner who wanted sex flat out telling their spouse that they needed sex and this is what they were going to do. That throws the ball back in the other partner's court so they can consider whether it's truly reasonable to dictate that your partner can't have a sex life at all.

Sometimes it's easier to get forgiveness than ask permission. For example, when I had 3 kids in 5 years, my sex drive became very low. There was just so much physical labor involved in raising the kids. I didn't use daycare, I was a full time mom and housewife. My ex didn't do much if any, housework or cleaning either.

So, his sex drive didn't change. I was just not up for it. I felt sorry for him, really, sometimes. Although I did resent him not doing housework. I would have had more energy for sex with less workload.

Anyway, years later, in therapy, he finally admitted that, in this period, he would sometimes stop at a strip club on the way home for a short while. I didn't mind at all. I thought, good for you, at least you had some experience of something sexual. I thought he was just watching. Again, much later, I realized, oh, maybe he was getting lap dances. Oh well.

But our marriage had other issues. To me, this minor cheating was no big deal in the larger scheme of things. It was just a symptom of bigger issues we had about open communication and self awareness. But if he'd "asked" me ahead of time, "Do you mind if I go to a strip club now and then?" I would've probably been upset. Even though we'd been to a few clubs back in our early relationship.

It was a case of what I didn't know, not hurting me. I guess that's an excuse cheaters often use.
 
Sometimes it's easier to get forgiveness than ask permission. .

Easier isn't better.

It's removing informed consent, delaying problem solving...like, easier sure. But so is ignoring my dog crying to go out at night. But all I'd do is wake up to a crap on the carpet YKWIM?

I'm still fond of him and still attracted to him. (More in my blog on this.) And he's attracted to me. I warned him not to marry this woman...Did he listen? No. And now... she won't have sex at all. Ugh. Why do people do this to themselves?

His wife doesn't know we've met in person twice this year. I know he's making bad choices.

It sounds like, for you, this is definitely a conflicted issue and I'm sorry that you're struggling. It would absolutely be hard to see a friend, and someone you would want to be sexually and/or romantically entangled with go through this. But....you're also choosing to be complicit in his lies.

===

Those choices are a bit more limited when kids are involved and there is not actual abuse within the relationship, just a evolution into sexual incompatibility.

Unless you live somewhere that has restrictive divorce critera, or leaving would present a danger to you or said children, or you financially are unable to...then I'm not sure how having kids, or especially simply growing apart, limits things? I've also never been divorced or have detailed family law knowledge, so this could also be a misunderstanding based on my ignorance.


Yea, calling the cheater a victim really doesn't sit well with me. They're actively making the choice to break on agreement. If they are a victim, it's of their own decision making.
 
Some cheaters have had their sex lives held hostage for years. They are a victim long before they start cheating. Cheating is a symptom of a situation which has been wall and wall after wall. Sure, perhaps they could leave,
it that also means leaving that 95% of their relationship that works just fine. Perhaps they can keep trying couples therapy. Or he can try talking with her in private, again. Perhaps they could state up front what they intend to do and let the partner make the final decision, although this is bound to year them apart in the most destructive of ways. Or he could be discreet and not rock the boat. There are plenty of choices. As I said, my friend is choosing celibacy and a sympathetic ear. But he's still a victim of her decree that she has no interest in not just her only sex life, but being in any way involved in his.

I can't stand those women.

They have no moral high ground.

Remember, he's tried to talk with her about solutions, she simply refuses to give anything at all. He's the victim. He'll still be a victim if he does cheat somewhere down the track.
 
Some cheaters have had their sex lives held hostage for years. They are a victim long before they start cheating. Cheating is a symptom of a situation which has been wall and wall after wall. Sure, perhaps they could leave,
it that also means leaving that 95% of their relationship that works just fine. Perhaps they can keep trying couples therapy. Or he can try talking with her in private, again. Perhaps they could state up front what they intend to do and let the partner make the final decision, although this is bound to year them apart in the most destructive of ways. Or he could be discreet and not rock the boat. There are plenty of choices. As I said, my friend is choosing celibacy and a sympathetic ear. But he's still a victim of her decree that she has no interest in not just her only sex life, but being in any way involved in his.

I can't stand those women.

They have no moral high ground.

Remember, he's tried to talk with her about solutions, she simply refuses to give anything at all. He's the victim. He'll still be a victim if he does cheat somewhere down the track.

She has no moral high ground for not giving him sex just because he wants it...that sounds...really gross. He isn't OWED sex just because they're married and just because he's horny. Her 'decree' is that her body is hers to do with as she wishes. Bodily autonomy is absolutely a thing.

Making adult choices is hard. He is choosing between getting a divorce then having the chance to have a more fulfilling relationship with someone else and staying where he is in what is not a fulfilling relationship. She won
t open up the relationship, she won't forego her bodily autonomy; he either follows the contract or TERMINATES IT.

It is HIS CHOICE to suffer in this way. HE CAN LEAVE. RELATIONSHIPS ARE NOT MANDATORY. By staying, all he is a victim of is his own fear or leaving. He could say "I'm so sorry, I love you, but I am not getting what I need from our relationship anymore. We have grown apart, and I need to leave." It doesn't have to be "I'm going to pork someone else now, toodles"

You also never really clarified how it's limited. Life changing due to choices is....natural. It's hard and can suck but it's up to us to make choices that we can to make our lives as good as we can.

He entered into a mono marriage; he agreed to that contract. Now that he's not getting sex mono no longer sounds so appealing. He has to either renegotiate or terminate. It's no different than if a poly dyad was to have issues with rules or boundaries. If they don't work, you renegotiate or terminate. My polycules have had to undergo renegotiation's; most people have experienced a break-up or divorce. Again, painful, shitty but damn, why be the person who cheats? It won't make them happy either-hiding something hurtful from someone they love isn't exactly painless either.

Cheating is the avoidance of an issue and the breaking of a 'contract'.

You want to sleep, your dog wants to shit. You ignore the dog, your carpet needs cleaning. The problem won't just up and go away, it gets smellier and harder to deal with.

If it was a job, you'd go to the contract holder and talk about what changes need to happen. They either agree, or negotiate, or decline. If you needed those chances to stay, and they didn't happen, you'd quit. Maybe not on the spot, but you'd leave the job.

You can't just say:

"My contract needs to be changed so I no longer work on Saturday" and then if your boss says "no" just...not show up on Saturday. You'd get terminated.
 
Last edited:
Since bodily autonomy does at least extend to the ability to say "no" to sex in a marriage (although the US still has some way to go for universal bodily autonomy...) I'm not saying she *has* to open her legs for her husband. Or even her mouth, except to form a few words.

Here's another option...

His wife recognises that she no longer wants to share sex with him and voluntarily consents to him finding other sex partners.

As for that monogamy contract, she's already rewritten the thing without his consent by refusing sex. She didn't renegotiate, she's just said "this is me now, your needs don't matter."
 
Since bodily autonomy does at least extend to the ability to say "no" to sex in a marriage (although the US still has some way to go for universal bodily autonomy...) I'm not saying she *has* to open her legs for her husband. Or even her mouth, except to form a few words.

Here's another option...

His wife recognises that she no longer wants to share sex with him and voluntarily consents to him finding other sex partners.

As for that monogamy contract, she's already rewritten the thing without his consent by refusing sex. She didn't renegotiate, she's just said "this is me now, your needs don't matter."

Here's another option, they split up due to being massively incompatible.

By implying that her saying "I am not having sex anymore" is saying "your needs don't matter" is not accurate. She is saying "I am not having sex anymore, and I need this relationship to be mono"

He is well within his rights to say "I need sex from a relationship for it to work, and since we are no longer having sex, we will either need to open the relationship, or I leave."

He doesn't have to stay, and he doesn't have to cheat.

And no, you're not saying she HAS to 'open her legs' but you're implying if she was a good wife she'd deny her own needs so he can get his rocks off. She needs no sex and for her, mono is a need. For him sex is a need and mono is NOT a need. They are incompatible and they should split up since this isn't a "just one thing", this is a fundamental difference that is making neither one feel good.

Some people don't function outside of a mono relationship structure and they shouldn't have to; some don't function within. Unless she is coercing him or forcing him into staying married then he isn't a victim. He's just spineless.
 
Well I guess that makes him the best husband ever for denying his own needs in order to keep the family together.

Of course he doesn't have to cheat. He is unlikely to ever do so. But he *is* a victim of (admittedly not intended at the beginning of the relationship) bait and switch. But she's changed her position. He's a responsible husband and father but one whose self esteem has really taken a beating. I know what that's like, I've been in a sexless relationship before. Sure, I left, but it was a whole bunch of things that lead to that.

"If you don't like it, leave or quit complaining" is simply too black and white for most people's circumstances.
 
Well I guess that makes him the best husband ever for denying his own needs in order to keep the family together.

But he *is* a victim of (admittedly not intended at the beginning of the relationship) bait and switch.

A divorce doesn't break a family. They're still a family after divorce. What breaks a family is living a life you're miserable with and building resentment. I know many people who are divorced and things stay amicable.

Bait and switch implys that she went into this KNOWING she was or would become asexual. "Ah, I, someone who never wants sex, will have sex with this man long enough to marry him, have kids with him...and TRAP HIM FOREVER" *INSERT EVIL LAUGH HERE*

Which, say she DID do it on purpose, she would be a bad person and he should leave her because that's horrible.

If you want to be with him, fine. Feelings are what they are and you're not bad people for being attracted to each other. But don't demonize her because she's making her needs known and he is picking her needs over his needs. He is making a choice to suffer. It's not noble and it doesn't make him a great dad or a great husband.
He isn't teaching his child to respect their own needs; he's teaching his child that they should stay in a relationship that cannot meet their needs.
He's not being a great husband because, honestly, no one can be a great partner when they're miserable like it sounds like he is. He actively sounds like he resents her already.
 
If you want to be with him, fine. Feelings are what they are and you're not bad people for being attracted to each other.

Ahhh, so here's the misunderstanding.

That's not part of the equation. This isn't about me and him being romantic or sexual. We love each other as friends but haven't looked to spark any sexual interest.

But I'm sick to death of the narrative that cheaters are such bad people in such black and white terms. Cheating generally isn't done with the deliberate intent to hurt the partner. Sometimes it's done out of a deep need sexual intimacy with another person. So yes, I'm demonizing all people, men and women, who sexually reject their partners and don't consent to alternative options. I'm demonizing the societal mores that would mean that risks anyone losing face, or their jobs, if the open relationship was also public.

He's just one particular example. I have more, because it's ridiculously common, suggesting that it's actually a societal norm albeit one that gets tut tutted about in public. Of course, a partner who has given up sex is not the only reason people cheat, some do it for the thrill and that's a different discussion altogether. I'm sure there are even more reasons, too.

Finally, that's just silly about the kids. They don't know, nor should they know, their parents sexual incompatibilities and that one person's needs aren't being met. They are compatible parents and compatible companions. That's what the kids see.
 
But I'm sick to death of the narrative that cheaters are such bad people in such black and white terms. Cheating generally isn't done with the deliberate intent to hurt the partner. Sometimes it's done out of a deep need sexual intimacy with another person. So yes, I'm demonizing all people, men and women, who sexually reject their partners and don't consent to alternative options. I'm demonizing the societal mores that would mean that risks anyone losing face, or their jobs, if the open relationship was also public.

Demonize the society all you want; society kinda deserves it for sure.

But then also demonize the people who, for what society says is a "not broken" family, stay in relationships that are not correct for them. Inaction is an action.

Finally, that's just silly about the kids. They don't know, nor should they know, their parents sexual incompatibilities and that one person's needs aren't being met. They are compatible parents and compatible companions. That's what the kids see.


Say something more like "While mom and dad love each other very much, we don't think being married anymore is good for us, we're better off as friends. We'll still be your parents and we'll always love you guys."

It's definitely better than "I'm leaving because [parent A] cheated on me!"

Kids can ask questions all they want, and you get to choose how to answer them. When it's age appropriate parents can go into detail about the hows and whys of divorce. Simply GETTING a divorce can teach kids that they do get to leave a relationship for more reasons than just abuse or big ticket items. YOu can simply no longer be compatible as spouses and thats okay.

Hell, there are people who literally move into the same townhouse complex or apartment complex so that they still basically live together. Divorce is what a couple makes of it. They wanna make it messy, they make it messy. They want to make it pain, they make it pain.

Z had no idea his parents were getting divorced until him and his mom moved out. Ultimately it was his dads cheating that made her make up her mind to leave. She made sure that the divorce stayed amicable and did her absolute best to make sure that he had the best relationship with his father possible. Hell, even during the divorce he never saw it get messy, even after he found out his dad cheated on his mom with like...3 different women.
 
Last edited:
ElMango, you're obviously entrenched in your position. That's fine. I hope you're never rejected sexually by your partner(s) and have to go through this kind of anguish.

I agree with Evie, that there are many reasons to stay with a partner even if the sex dries up on one end. However, I do kind of think sex is expected, if not required, in marriage. The phrase, "to have and to hold," is very euphemistic. In England, they say more in their traditional vows.

as the groom places the ring on the bride's finger, he says the following:

With this Ring I thee wed, with my body I thee worship, and with all my worldly goods I thee endow: In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen

Having and holding bodies, and worshiping your wife with your body, seems to imply more, in an adult relationship, than just cuddling.

There are guarantees in Jewish marriages, that if a man does not satisfy his wife sexually, that is grounds for divorce. Married couples are required by Jewish law to have sex on the Sabbath. It is thought that when a couple has sex, this causes Yahweh and the Shekinah his wife, to have sex in heaven, therefore making them happy and bestowing blessings on their people!

There's a lot of expectation in marriage that your "one and only" is your long time sex partner.

Of course, in reality, sex often does wane. There's a saying, "kissin' don't last, cookin' do."

Therefore we have the "oldest profession" of prostitution.

I really wish we could go back to the olden days when sex workers (male and female) lived in temples and you honored the goddess by fucking them. This persisted until Roman times. It took place in the Jewish Temple, and everywhere. (Yes, the goddess Asherah was honored in the Jewish Temple with sex. The sex workers' title was "holy one." Qudesha [plural] for women, qudeshim for men.) Any children conceived were the children of the goddess.

Our present society has worked its way around a monogamous mindset by providing many ways to get sex with others. Cheating has been far and away the most common. And women were EXPECTED to be rather or completely asexual. The Church preached sex only for procreation until very recently. Everyone turned a blind eye to men cheating. Women were encouraged to think little of it, boys will be boys.

Wives were trained to believe they had no sex drive, and to submit to sex as a mere duty to their husbands. Of course, if a woman was unfulfilled sexually, she was diagnosed as a hysteric or a nyphomaniac. And she was hated for her sexual allure and power, while being desired at the same time. Women are the keyholders for sex. Men have traditionally resented this greatly, and demonized women for millennia.

So, now, with the rise of feminism, sexual mores are changing. But they are in a state of flux. Some women and men are asexual just by nature. I'm sure some women still deny their own sexuality because they are frightened of its power over them, and they feel slut shamed when they can't control the desire.

Open marriages are seen as weird and shameful still, just as divorce was 100 years ago. We can't expect everyone to Open their marriage easily and joyfully. We also can't expect everyone to give up the many comforts of marriage just because of incompatible libidos.

My sister became asexual after menopause. Her husband didn't lose his sex drive. And he's kind of macho, he resented the idea he should just masturbate. They made a cold contract. She'd "lie back and think of England" twice a week, and he'd get to use her vagina. Then she got certain favors in return, dinner out a few times a week, since she doesn't like to cook!
 
ElMango, you're obviously entrenched in your position. That's fine. I hope you're never rejected sexually by your partner(s) and have to go through this kind of anguish.

My ethics are such that I hold their informed consent higher than my libido.
Of course I am entrenched in that. Just as you are entrenched in your views; neither of us are going to change our views on this. I value bodily autonomy, informed and enthusiastic consent, and independence very, very highly. I could not live a life with the expectation that I would have to have sex because otherwise I'm the bad guy. Maybe it's a Canadian thing, but that wasn't enforced that sex /had/ to be a part of marriage and relationships, but tsomething to do when you are safe and ready. We also didn't have the "sex is just for babies" cultural thing at least when I was growing up.

Since I'm already openly poly, then, I say that I'd never be without the ability to find more sex. Even then, yeah, I'd end a relationship before cheating if nothing else would make things compatible again.


I agree with Evie, that there are many reasons to stay with a partner even if the sex dries up on one end.
I agree! There are many reasons to stay! Sex is not mandatory. But If you are dissatisfied enough with no sex then either change the monogamy or get out, cheating is not the answer. You make your bed by staying in a mono marriage you aren't fulfilled by, not cheating is lying in it.

Also, for the vows; how is it worship to break a contract? MMasturbate and think of your wife; boom, worshiping with your body


There are guarantees in Jewish marriages, that if a man does not satisfy his wife sexually, that is grounds for divorce.

Grounds for divorce, not adultry.

Also, Jewish law also says that you can't have sex if you're not married to that person. So. Even IF Married couples are required by Jewish law to have sex on the Sabbath (Which I found no evidence of it being a requirement but a encouragement), it would be with their spouse.

I really wish we could go back to the olden days when sex workers (male and female) lived in temples and you honored the goddess by fucking them.
According to cultural norms at the time this wouldn't be considered cheating.

Open marriages are seen as weird and shameful still, just as divorce was 100 years ago. We can't expect everyone to Open their marriage easily and joyfully. We also can't expect everyone to give up the many comforts of marriage just because of incompatible libidos.
And the way to normalize open relationships is for more people to have them; can't force people to but eventually they do normalize.

I can't expect people to give up the comforts of marriage because they don't have incompatible libidos; I do expect them to be honest with their partner, communicate their needs, and allow their partner to know that "hey, I need sex so either we work something out that makes us both happy, or I need to move on" insteadd of cheating.

My sister became asexual after menopause. Her husband didn't lose his sex drive. And he's kind of macho, he resented the idea he should just masturbate. They made a cold contract. She'd "lie back and think of England" twice a week, and he'd get to use her vagina. Then she got certain favors in return, dinner out a few times a week, since she doesn't like to cook!

The few times I haven't been in the mood and just went 'meh fine' it honestly wasn't good for my relationship; they could tell I wasn't my usual self. As my partners said, if they wanted a fuck sleeve they'd buy a fleshlight. Having an enthusiastic participant is more important to them than getting their rocks off using my vagina as if I'm an object.

If she openly consents tot his, that's her bag. She's consented to this, and I'm going to assume enjoys if not the sex, the rewards. Good for them for finding something that works for them. But many people are like myself, they do not want to be a living fuck toy and would actively reject a life that would make me such.



I'm not even saying someone who cheats is a bad person; I'm saying t hey're human, making a human choice, that is unethical. They are knowingly choosing to live in a lie and break a contract. They are making a bad choice, even if it is for a very sympathetic reason.
 
Last edited:
My post wasn't to refute your views, just to offer a history lesson on a difficult problem. We aren't going to solve it here.
 
“Informed consent” keeps coming up. What do you mean by that in the case of a sexless marriage, ElMango? If Andy says she’s done having sexual contact with husband Bertie, then how does informed consent apply to what Bertie does with Chris? “Informed consent” sounds curiously medical for two people who aren’t having sex anymore. It sounds like what you’re saying is that Bertie should let Andy control what Bertie does with his own body, even when it can’t affect her own health. That isn’t informed consent. That’s control.

I’m of the mind to take such things on a case by case basis. Ideally everyone says what they want, and when they can’t all meet their needs within the relationship, it is amicably terminated. But people aren’t that clean about things.

Once one person has unilaterally line-vetoed the (unwritten, but presumably including monogamous conjugal relations) contract, I don’t see why anyone should consider it binding any longer. Sure, they should be better at communicating and solving problems. But that’s no more Bertie’s job than Andy’s.

I’m gonna trust Bertie (and Andy - she is exercising agency as well) to manage their relationship, rather than impose my broad moral guidelines on them.
 
Back
Top